Search

How can we help?

Icon

New ruling provides health and safety detriment

Protection from health and safety detriments and the right to PPE should cover ‘workers’ as well as employees, High Court rules.

Until coronavirus arrived in the UK places like offices, shops, care homes,  hospitality venues and other peoples’ own homes were rarely considered to be potentially dangerous places to work.  That’s why so few businesses had any awareness or experience of their employees’ rights under S44 and S100 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. In brief, S44 and S100 protect employees from being subjected to a detriment, or being dismissed if they leave work, refuse to attend work, or take some action, because they reasonably believe there is a threat of ‘serious and imminent danger’.  It often comes as a surprise to employers that it is the employee’s belief that counts, depending on the  information available to them at the time, and not the employer’s opinion.

Protection from health and safety detriments and the right to PPE should cover ‘workers’ as well as employees, High Court rules.

The right not to subjected to H&S detriments, and the right to be provided with PPE where an activity at work cannot be avoided, derive from European Directives (The Framework Directive and The Personal Protective Equipment Directive).  However, in UK law these rights only apply to employees, not workers. In its application for a judicial review, the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWUGB) argued that the government had failed to implement these European H&S Directives and that workers should be given the same protection as employees. Last week the High Court agreed with the IWUGB [The Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain v The Secretary of State for Work & Pensions and others]

With so many workers in the gig economy operating in public facing roles, from care workers to taxi and deliver drivers, this case significantly expands the number of people afforded H&S protection, and the right to bring claims against their employers. If businesses had an urgent need to understand these key H&S rights when COVID 19 first afflicted the UK last Spring, that need is even greater now.

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 15 September 2025
  • Immigration

Sharp rise in Sponsor Licence Revocations – What employers need to know

The Home Office has reported a record number of sponsor licence revocations over the past year, as part of its intensified efforts to crack down on abuse of the UK’s immigration system.

art
  • 10 September 2025
  • Commercial Real Estate

Trouble at the Table: The Challenges Facing the UK Hospitality Sector in the run up to Christmas 2025

The UK hospitality sector, long celebrated for its vibrancy and resilience, is facing a perfect storm of economic, operational, and structural challenges in 2025.

art
  • 09 September 2025
  • Commercial Real Estate

Le bail commercial anglais: quelques points essentiels à considérer

Typiquement, les baux commerciaux en Angleterre sont de court terme, d’une durée de 5 ou 10 ans, avec un loyer de marché et des ajustements du loyer périodiques en fonction de l’inflation ou d’autres facteurs. 

art
  • 09 September 2025
  • Corporate and M&A

The Failure to Prevent Fraud Offence – be prepared to avoid criminal liability

The failure to prevent fraud offence is a new corporate offence which has come into force on 1 September 2025.

art
  • 08 September 2025
  • Employment

Can employers still make changes to contracts after the Employment Rights Bill?

The short answer is yes but it will be much more difficult for employers following the introduction of the Employment Rights Bill because their ability to fairly dismiss employees who do not agree contractual changes is being restricted. 

art
  • 05 September 2025
  • Privacy and Data Protection

When Ignoring a DSAR Becomes a Criminal Offence

On 3 September 2025, Mr Jason Blake appeared at Beverley Magistrates Court and was fined for failing to respond to a data subject access request (DSAR).